Skip to main content
ESG Report 2023

Climate Change

In 2023, Alamos published its inaugural Climate Change Report. Moving forward, the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosure (TCFD) and other requests for climate-related disclosure (such as IFRS S2) will be addressed in this Climate Change section of our annual ESG Report. 

TCFD Index

TCFD Recommended Disclosure Location
Governance Describe the board’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities Climate Governance
Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities Climate Governance
Strategy Describe the climate-related risks and opportunities the organization has identified over the short, medium, and long term Climate Risk Management > Table 7.1

Climate Risk Management > Table 7.2

Climate Strategy > Table 7.5
Describe the resilience of the organization’s strategy, taking into consideration different climate-related scenarios, including a 2°C or lower scenario Climate Risk Assessment > Table 7.3
Describe the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on the organization’s businesses, strategy, and financial planning Climate Strategy
Risk Management Describe the organization’s process for identifying and assessing climate-related risks Climate Risk Management > Risk Assessment Methodology
Describe the organization’s processes for managing climate-related risks Climate Strategy
Describe how processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks are integrated into the organization’s overall risk management Climate Risk Management > Risk Assessment Methodology
Metrics and Targets Disclose the metrics used by the organization to assess climate-related risks and opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process Climate Metrics & Targets > Scope 1 and 2
Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and the related risks Climate Metrics & Targets > Scope 1 and 2

Climate Metrics & Targets > Scope 3
Describe the targets used by the organization to manage climate-related risks and opportunities and performance against targets. Climate Strategy > Figure 7.3

Climate Governance

Alamos acknowledges climate change as a critical international concern to which the carbon footprint of the mining industry contributes. As is the case for most large companies, Alamos is subject to climate-related risk, including physical risks (i.e., resulting from changes to climate such as wildfires, floods, and storms) and transition risks (i.e., resulting from policy changes and other business-related volatilities). These risks are carefully considered at the highest level of our organization. Members of Alamos senior management have been assigned climate-related responsibilities, and Committees of the Board consider climate-related issues when reviewing and guiding strategy. Each year, the Company’s Executive Officers develop and recommend a strategic plan for approval by the Board. Our climate-related strategy is incorporated within this strategic plan.  

 

Figure 7.1

Board of Directors

Technical & Sustainability Committee

Audit Committee

Climate Change Steering Committee

Climate Change Working Group

Corporate Sustainability Group

Island Gold

Young-Davidson

Mulatos

Lynn Lake

In 2023 Alamos established a Climate Change Working Group and a Climate Change Steering Committee. The Working Group is tasked with ensuring the implementation of the Company’s Energy & Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Management Standard, the deployment of our emissions-reduction strategy, and the consistent measurement of energy use and GHG emissions at all Alamos operations to measure progress.  It consists of corporate representatives (the Director of Environmental Sustainability and a member of the Finance team), mine site representatives (all General Managers and Energy or Environmental Managers from Young-Davidson, Island Gold, and Mulatos), and development project representatives (the Lynn Lake Project Director). The Climate Change Steering Committee is informed by the Climate Change Working Group, and is responsible for providing strategic guidance, building consensus on the development of new climate-related guidelines, and reviewing the progress of the Working Group in achieving Company goals. Made up of the Vice President (VP) of Sustainability & External Affairs, the Chief Operating Officer (COO), the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), the Senior VP (SVP) of Technical Services, and the Senior VP (SVP) of Projects, the Steering Committee communicates progress against goals and targets to the Board via the Technical & Sustainability (T&S) Committee and Audit Committee three to four times per year.  

Climate Risk Management

RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

 

Alamos faces two types of climate-related risks: physical risks and transition risks. Physical risks represent the potential impacts of a warming climate system on the Company, such as the increased likelihood and severity of extreme weather events, sea-level rise, water stress, ecosystem change, and biodiversity loss. They can be event-driven (acute) or associated with longer term shifts in climate patterns (chronic), and are specific to the unique geographic circumstances associated with each site. Transition risks are the financial and reputational risks associated with regulatory, economic, and societal changes related to climate change, such as carbon taxes, cap-and-trade systems, abatement costs, and shareholder activism.  

 

In 2023, Alamos updated its original Climate Change Risk Assessment from 2020. The 2023 assessment was conducted against Alamos’ updated Enterprise Risk Matrix, and reviewed existing physical and transition risks and opportunities through the lenses of multiple climate scenarios and multiple time horizons. The assessment covered our operating mines (Young-Davidson, Island Gold, and Mulatos), as well as the Lynn Lake Gold Project and the closed El Chanate mine. 

 

Additional work included financial calculations on the top climate-related risks and opportunities, a mitigation plan and assessment of our resulting resiliency against the top risks, and guidance on incorporating climate change risks into strategic planning. Leveraging leading practices from ISO 14091 (climate change adaptation), ISO 31001 (risk management) and additional scenarios and time horizons, physical and transition risks and opportunities were re-evaluated from the original 2020 Climate Risk Assessment. The top risks and opportunities as well as accompanying metrics were identified, and their anticipated effects on our financial position, financial performance and cash flows were determined. A mitigation plan was developed for the top risks, and information was provided to support the incorporation of updated climate-related risks into Alamos’ Enterprise Risk Management system. Top risks were analyzed under the assumption of new control mechanisms to determine our resiliency, and the results were used to inform potential strategy options for consideration in future strategic planning. 

Physical Risks

 

Physical climate factors assessed for each Alamos operation, project and closed site included mean temperature, total precipitation, fluvial flood, very heavy precipitation days, water stress, consecutive drought days, cold spell duration index, warm spell duration index, wildfires, wind, and monthly precipitation. Alamos identified over eighty climate-related physical risks to our operations and projects. These risks were all noted as having the potential to negatively impact employee safety, local communities, the local environment, and Company assets (through potential disruptions to permitting, mine operation, ore extraction, and closure). The top physical risks (identified as High or Moderate on our Risk Matrix) were then brought forward to be reviewed in substantially more detail. Physical risk scenarios were identified using the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Shared Socio Economic Pathways (SSPs) framework. The SSPs “make assumptions of how population, education, energy use, technology – and more – may change over the next century, and couple them with assumptions about the level of ambition for mitigating climate change”1. The SSPs are built upon the IPCC’s various Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios, which model different concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere under various time horizons and other conditions. Alamos used the SSP2-4.5 scenario (SSP 2 combined with RCP 4.5, which denotes an estimated warming of 2.7°C by end of century) for the Base Case, and the SSP5-8.5 scenario (SSP 5 combined with RCP 8.5, which denotes an estimated warming of 4.4°C by end of century) for the High Emissions Stress Test. Each scenario was run for 2 different timeframes, medium-term (2030) and long-term (2050).  

Top Physical Risks – SSP5-8.5 Scenario (High Emissions Stress Test)

Table 7.1

Climate Impact Drivers Description of Risk Site Risk Rating Current Controls
Forest Fires Impacts to employee safety, and disruption to mine operations and power supply. Forest fires may cause:

  • reduced visibility, limiting the ability for personnel to access sites or operate equipment safely;

  • smoke resulting in health and safety concerns;

  • power outages in the area disrupting mine operations and/or initiating reliance on emergency diesel generators with potentially insufficient supply and reduced efficiency due to smoke;

  • reduced ability for supply chains to replace diesel.

 Lynn Lake High Fire prevention and suppression systems, cleared buffer around critical infrastructure, training of site personnel, non-combustible material construction
Storms Disruption to mine operations. Storms may cause:

  • reduced ability for planes to transport personnel to site.

 Lynn Lake High Rescheduling of flights, maintaining an ore stockpile
Warm Spells Impacts to employee safety and disruption to mine operations. Warm spells may cause:

  • heat exhaustion and dehydration in personnel.

Mulatos High Safety Program reviews, extreme temperature procedures, prevalence of on-site hydration solutions, frequent breaks built into schedules.
Heavy Precipitation Impacts to employee safety and disruption to mine operations. Heavy precipitation may cause:

  • the exceedance of water pumping and treatment capacity;

  • compromised slope stability.

 Mulatos High Radar monitoring of slopes, Emergency Response Plan

Transition Risks

 

Some key transition risk factors considered in our original 2020 assessment included: GHG emission regulations (increasing to $170/tCO2e by 2030 in Canada, and $125/tCO2e by 2040 for developing economies); renewable electricity generation shares (increasing to 64% in Canada, 88% in Mexico, and 56% in Türkiye2 by 2040); the cost of renewable energy (increasing to $50/MWh for solar photovoltaics and $70/MWh for offshore wind by 2040); the cost of abatement (increasing to approximately $1,000/tCO2e under Sustainable Development Scenario-relevant conditions by 2040); the cost of fuels (crude oil at $59/barrel and natural gas at $3.2MBtu by 2040); fossil fuel subsidies (fossil fuel subsidies phased out by 2025 in net-importing countries and by 2035 in net-exporting countries); and carbon reduction policies (policies promoting production and use of alternative fuels and technologies such as hydrogen, biogas, biomethane and Carbon Capture, Use, and Storage [CCUS] across sectors).  

 

In 2023, the analysis on transition risks & opportunities was deepened to include specific reference to the TCFD’s four key transition risk areas of Policy & Legal, Market, Technology, and Reputational for each of our three jurisdictions (Ontario, Manitoba, and Mexico). Using the International Energy Agency (IEA) framework, Alamos used the Announced Pledges Scenario (APS) (which assumes all countries fully implement their announced pledges/targets) for the Base Case, and the Net Zero Emissions (NZE) scenario (which assumes countries introduce more stringent policies than are currently in force in order for the global energy sector to achieve net zero emissions by 2050) for the High Stringency Stress Test. Each scenario was assessed against short-term (2025), medium-term (2030), and long-term (2050) timelines. 

Top Transition Risks – NZE 2030 (High Stringency Stress Test)

Table 7.2

TCFD Category Description of Risk Location / Site Risk Rating Current Controls
Policy & Legal

Technology 		Regulations that force the elimination or severe reduction of underground diesel usage (either through cost basis or actual policy). Ontario High None (newly defined risk)
Market

Policy & Legal 		Inability to get grid electricity due to lack of generator capacity, with prioritisation given to critical mineral/green technology customers. Ontario & Manitoba High None (battery storage Feasibility Study underway)
Policy & Legal Regulatory changes to account for increasing storm events such as requiring a design for a 1 in 1,000 year rainstorm (as seen recently in Quebec). Ontario & Manitoba High None (newly defined risk)
Technology The investment cost and unproven nature of new technology could reduce productivity and profit margins. Difficulties in integrating new technologies, such as electric mining equipment, with existing systems. Corporate High Electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles underground
Policy & Legal

Technology 		Increased compliance obligations as a result of participation in emission trading systems (Canada’s Output-Based Pricing System [OBPS] & Ontario’s Emission Performance Standard [EPS]) Ontario & Manitoba High Early estimation of costs for projects, electric equipment, GHG reduction plan
Policy & Legal

Technology 		Increased stringency of emission trading systems (ETS) to align with net zero. Ontario & Manitoba High Early estimation of costs for projects, electric equipment, GHG reduction plan

Market Higher insurance premiums and/or difficulty to obtain insurance coverage. Corporate High Estimate insurance premiums during due diligence for new acquisitions

Climate Risk Mitigation & Resilience

 

In this context, mitigation refers to the installation of controls to reduce the consequence or frequency of a climate-related risk to levels deemed acceptable by Alamos. Resilience refers to the degree to which  our strategy supports and maintains our capacity to survive, adapt, and grow in the face of turbulent change under different climate scenarios. For each of Alamos’ top physical and transition risks, after current controls were identified, possible additional controls were proposed and a theoretical residual risk rating (the level of risk remaining after existing and proposed controls) was calculated. A high theoretical residual risk rating equates to low resilience. 

 

Table 7.3 provides an overview of Alamos’ climate resilience with the application of controls under the Stress Test cases, i.e. the most extreme climate-related scenarios (RCP8.5 for Physical Risks and NZE for Transition Risks), in 2030.  

 

 

Resilience to Top Climate Risks Under Stress Test Scenarios

Table 7.3

Risk Proposed Additional Controls Theoretical Residual Risk Rating Resilience
Forest fire causing disruption to mine operations, power supply and employee safety (Lynn Lake) Purchase additional insurance coverage; conduct regular review with insurance provider; seek integration into the Town of Lynn Lake’s wildfire emergency response plan; formalize the regular tracking of smoke and fires in region. Moderate Risk (Reduction from High) Moderate
Forest fire or storms disrupting the transportation of personnel to site (Lynn Lake) Maintain additional ore stockpile on site through LOM; develop evacuation protocol; develop SOPs to account for fire and smoke conditions. Moderate Risk (Reduction from High) Moderate
Warm spells causing worker heat stress (Mulatos) Formalize heat stress procedure; implement PPE with UV protection. Low Risk (Unchanged) High
Heavy precipitation exceeding pumping demand and resulting in slope stability issues (Mulatos) Increase pumping capacity; conduct contingency planning for extreme precipitation events. Low Risk (Reduction from High) High
Increased compliance obligations due to participation in the OBPS and EPS (Manitoba & Ontario) Further electrification of equipment; additional use of biofuels; internal carbon price for decision making. High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Increasing stringency of OBPS and EPS (Manitoba & Ontario) Perform future scenario analysis by varying stringency factors; closely monitor climate-related policy changes. High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Regulatory changes due to increasing storm events such as requiring a design for a 1 in 1,000 year rain storm (Manitoba & Ontario) Incorporate climate change into new tailings facility design. High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Higher insurance premiums and/or difficulty obtaining insurance (Corporate) Proactive engagement with insurance providers. High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Forced elimination/reduction of underground diesel usage due to new regulation, either through cost basis or actual policy (Ontario) Purchase hybrid equipment; increase use of renewable fuels; use most efficient diesel engines (Tier 5). High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Inability to get grid electricity due to lack of generator capacity, with prioritisation given to critical mineral/green technology customers (Ontario & Manitoba) Battery storage on site; pursue energy efficiency measures. High Risk (Unchanged) Low
Reduced productivity and profit margins due to the investment cost and unproven nature of new technology (Corporate) Seek government funding for electric equipment; trial usage of BEV equipment. Moderate Risk (Reduction from High) Moderate

Under the Stress Test cases (the most extreme scenarios), it was determined that Alamos has a relatively low resilience to most of the top climate-related risks identified. For some risks, the addition of proposed new controls helped mitigate these risks and improve our resilience. Resilience results were used to inform potential strategy options to consider in Alamos’ future strategic planning. Some of the key options to build a climate lens into Alamos’ strategic planning include:  

 

  • Target new acquisitions that are already low emitting or have capacity to easily reduce emissions, 
  • Proactively evaluate the implications of acquisitions, divestments, and organic growth on Alamos’ 30% GHG emission reduction target, 
  • Analyze how the water balance at each current or acquired site may change in the future due to climate change, and 
  • Electrify operations in Canada wherever possible to reduce compliance obligations. 

Climate Strategy

In support of Canada’s commitment to the Paris Accord and per the recommendations of the TCFD, Alamos announced its Company-wide GHG emissions reduction target in June 2022. By 2030, Alamos aims to reduce its absolute GHG emissions by 30% from our 2020/2021 average baseline year (a calculated emissions baseline of 170,000 tCO2e). This averaged baseline was determined to be reflective of a standard year of Alamos’ existing operations, following an in-depth review of our mines’ operating conditions and associated emissions between 2018 and 2021 wherein circumstances such as project development and COVID-19 constraints were considered. This target is inclusive of Scope 1 and 2 emissions of all GHGs covered by the Kyoto Protocol3, and is considered a credible target4 per the Carbon Disclosure Project.

 

In developing a strategy to meet this target, Alamos reviewed and costed over 30 different GHG emission reduction opportunities across the organization. Working with an independent energy and carbon management expert, options for renewable energy and clean grid capacity, green fleets (hybrid or battery electric vehicles), the electrification of mining activities, and conversion to cleaner fuels were investigated. These potential projects were assessed using a Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC), which compares the Net Present Value (NPV) of each opportunity to their GHG abatement potential in kt CO2e (Figure 7.2). The MACC analysis allowed Alamos to identify six future projects to prioritise (Table 7.4) in addition to those previously existing emission reduction initiatives already underway (such as the construction of a powerline at Mulatos to facilitate connection to the Mexico national electricity grid and save 15,000 tCO2e per year).

INPV Table Image. Please view the text descriptions page to read the content of this table in plain text.

MACC-Identified Emissions Reduction Projects

Table 7.4

Opportunity Impact Current Likelihood Magnitude of Impact Time Horizon Cost
Ventilation on Demand System Reducing a mine’s underground ventilation load has one of the largest potentials for energy savings. Island Gold’s implementation of a Ventilation On Demand (VOD) system is ongoing and will result in four hours of energy savings on the ventilation system per day.


The estimated savings from reduced electricity consumption are approximately $650,000/year. 		Virtually Certain Medium Short-Term The cost to implement VOD has already been realized, though additional person-hours are required to calibrate and optimize the VOD system on an ongoing basis throughout the life of mine.
Hydraulic Mining Shovels As part of the updated 2023 feasibility study of the Lynn Lake Gold Project, Alamos investigated the application of electric hydraulic mining shovels instead of conventional diesel hydraulic shovels. Electric equipment has a higher upfront cost, but its operating costs and associated emissions (i.e., carbon tax costs) are much lower.


The implementation of electric hydraulic mining shovels at Lynn Lake will reduce annual emissions by 2,500 tCO2e/year and provide cost savings of $600,000/year. 		Likely Medium Medium-Term The additional capex to purchase electric hydraulic mining shovels as compared to planned diesel shovels is estimated to be $1.4M.


The cost to realize this opportunity depends on additional load capacity requirements on the Manitoba Hydro electrical grid (i.e., potential new grid infrastructure requirements), as well as the incremental cost of electric equipment versus diesel equipment.
Electric Production Drills As part of the updated 2023 feasibility study of the Lynn Lake Gold Project, Alamos investigated the application of electric production drills instead of conventional diesel production drills. Electric equipment has a higher upfront cost, but its operating costs and associated emissions (i.e., carbon tax costs) are much lower.


The implementation of electric production drills at Lynn Lake will reduce annual emissions by 1,800 tCO2e/year and provide annual cost savings of $424,000. 		Likely Medium-Low Medium-Term The additional capex to purchase electric production drills compared to planned diesel drills is estimated to be $1.9M.


The cost to realize this opportunity depends on additional load capacity requirements on the electrical grid (i.e., potential new grid infrastructure requirements), as well as the incremental cost of electric equipment versus diesel equipment.
Conversion from Propane to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) At the end of 2022 the Young-Davidson Mine began using CNG for mine heating as opposed to propane. This fuel switch is expected to reduce GHG emissions by 2,500 tCO2e/year and provide cost savings of $1.5M/year. This option is also being investigated for implementation at the Island Gold mine. Certain (Complete) Medium Short-Term The full capex to switch from propane to CNG was $757,000. As the fuel-switching required additional investments in new technology and infrastructure, this was not considered an incremental cost.
Air Heat Recovery Unit An air heat recovery unit (i.e., using exhaust air from the mine to heat fresh air going underground) at Island Gold could reduce emissions by 1,500 tCO2e/year and provide cost savings of $361,000/year. Unlikely Medium-Low Medium-Term The full capex to implement a mine ventilation air heat recovery unit and associated infrastructure is $1.8M. As the unit would require additional investment for construction and infrastructure, this is not considered an incremental cost.
Renewable Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) The Mulatos mine is a remote operation that currently generates its power from on-site diesel generators. Entering a Renewable PPA to replace this diesel-generated electricity would allow Mulatos to reduce emissions by 10,600 tCO2e/year. About as Likely as Not Medium-High Medium-Term The estimated cost of this project is $270,000 annually. It is unclear whether this opportunity results in a net gain in investment. Alamos intends to work with a third-party consultancy to investigate this opportunity.

Alamos also expects to achieve a 55% reduction in its GHG emission intensity per ounce of gold produced by successfully applying our emission reduction strategy. The expected results are quantified and graphically represented in Figure 7.3. The orange line represents Alamos’ expected annual emissions following the application of our strategy, while the black bars indicate the expected quantity of emissions reductions in each calendar year. A linearized trajectory for standard year-on-year reductions that would satisfy our emissions reduction target is presented in dark blue. Also represented for comparison are the expected results of the Business-As-Usual (BAU) scenario in yellow, and the linearized trajectory for emissions reductions which satisfy a 1.5°C target in blue.  

Alamos 30% Reduction Pathway

Figure 7.3

GHG Reductions (tCO2e/year)

30% Reduction target GHG emissions (tCO2e)

Resulting Emissions (tCO2e)

1.5 Degree Target GHG Emissions (tCO2e)

BAU Emissions (tCO2e)

In addition to the projects outlined above, our updated 2023 climate risk assessment identified 19 climate-related opportunities within the TCFD categories of Resource Efficiency, Energy Source, Products and Services, Markets, and Resilience. The top five opportunities (determined based on a weighted ranking of GHG reduction potential and cost reduction potential) are described in Table 7.5 and highlight areas for Alamos to consider as our strategy to address climate change continues to evolve. 

Top Climate Opportunities 2023

Table 7.5

TCFD Category Opportunity Location
Resource Efficiency Warming climate resulting in less mine air heating for underground operations (GHG and cost reduction) Young-Davidson, Island Gold
Energy Source Fuel switching from propane to compressed natural gas (GHG reduction) Island Gold
Products and Services Increase premium for low emission gold (increased margins) Corporate
Markets Subsidies for Low Emission Projects (cost reduction) Corporate
Markets Lower Financing rates for ESG performance (cost reduction) Corporate

Alamos’ strategy will deepen as we expand our focus to include: 

  • Implementation of a Climate Change Roadmap 
  • Dedicated site-based energy management teams and programs 
  • Investigation of new opportunities and technologies to reduce GHG emissions 
  • Ongoing improvement of our Scope 3 emissions estimation approach by continuing to move away from spend-based methodologies towards supplier-provided data 
  • Finalization of a Scope 3 emissions reduction target and strategy 
  • Consideration of a potential net-zero target for 2050 

Climate Metrics & Targets

SCOPE 1 AND 2

 

100% of air emissions at Alamos mines fall under emissions-limiting regulations, as both Canada and Mexico have implemented regulations to monitor, report and/or reduce emissions. Petroleum diesel used in heavy duty vehicles (at all sites) and electricity generation (at Mulatos) form the majority of Alamos’ direct emissions footprint, followed by propane (Island Gold) and CNG (Young-Davidson) for underground mine and building heating. Other direct emission sources include gasoline combustion in light vehicles (at all sites), heavy fuel oil combusted in explosives (at Island Gold), and small volumes of diesel used in explosives (at all sites). Indirect emissions are attributed to purchased electricity from national grids (at Young-Davidson and Island Gold). Alamos only reports direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 2) emissions from its producing mines – the total Scope 1 and 2 emissions of our development projects, closed mines, and offices combined account for less than 1% of Alamos’ total emissions. 

 

All gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol5 are regularly monitored and reported to local government authorities at each of our operating sites (consolidated by operational control). Alamos does not produce or export Ozone-Depleting Substances (ODSs), and, while a thorough assessment of purchased materials has not been conducted, no ODSs are knowingly imported. Our emissions monitoring programs include the sampling of emissions from stationary sources (such as power generators, boilers, and furnaces) and continuous air sampling in the areas surrounding our mines to manage and mitigate effects on surrounding communities.  

Gross Scope 1 Emissions Breakdown8

Table 7.6

Kyoto Protocol Gas Total Emissions (tCO2e)
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 148,266
Methane (CH4) 628
Nitrous Oxide (N2O) 2,890
Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) 0
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) 380
Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) 0
Total 152,164

Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions by Site (tCO2e)

Table 7.7

Young-Davidson Island Gold Mulatos Alamos Total:
2023 		Alamos Total:
2022		 Alamos Total:
2021
Scope 1 (Direct) 21,634 20,111 110,419 152,164 168,8229 178,506
Scope 2 (Indirect)10 8,006 2,785 96 10,887 9,600 10,709
Total 29,640 22,896 110,515 163,051 178,63311 189,214

Combined Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions Annual Comparison by Site

Figure 7.4


Young-Davidson: 7% decrease

Island Gold: 27% increase

Mulatos: 14% decrease

In 2023, our company-wide total GHG emissions (combined scope 1 and 2) were 15,582 tCO2e (9%) less than the year prior, representing a total 30% progress towards our 2030 emissions reduction target. This progress was largely due to fewer emissions at the Mulatos Mine complex following the cessation of mining at the Mulatos pit in mid 2023. Emissions were also lower at Young-Davidson, following a full year of CNG usage after its transition from propane in late 2022. Island Gold reported an expected increase of 4,802tCO2e, accounting for the continued ramp-up of construction activities at the mine’s Phase 3+ expansion. When this expansion becomes operational, Island Gold is expected to significantly increase gold production (average 287,000 oz/year compared to the 2023 production of 131,400 oz) with a 35% reduction in life of mine emissions. On average, the gold mining industry produces 0.83 tCO2e/oz worldwide6. With a 2023 company-wide emissions intensity of 0.31 tCO2e/oz, Alamos is an industry leader. We expect to remain in this position, as the achievement of our 30% absolute emissions reduction target will further decrease our emission intensity by 55%.7

Emission Intensity Reduction Based On 2023 GHG Reduction Strategy

Figure 7.5

GHG (tCO2e) Emission Intensity Ratios

Table 7.8

Young-Davidson Island Gold Mulatos Alamos Total:
2023		 Alamos Total:
2022		 Alamos Total:
2021
GHG per tonne of ore mined 0.01 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03
GHG per tonne of ore treated 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02
GHG per ounce of gold production 0.16 0.17 0.52 0.31 0.39 0.41

Emission Intensity Reduction Based On 2023 GHG Reduction Strategy

Figure 7.6

Reference12

SCOPE 3

 

Scope 3 emissions describe indirect GHG emissions resulting from activities in our value chain that are outside of our operational control. They include upstream emissions related to the extraction and production of the materials we purchase for use at our operations, downstream emissions from refining, and emissions from transportation on both ends of our value chain. For Scope 3 emission estimates, all Alamos locations are included. In 2023, Alamos worked with a third party to improve the way we calculate Scope 3 estimates. A detailed modelling tool was developed and will continue to be used as we move away from spend-based methodologies towards supplier-provided data. The tool uses the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) for Global Warming Potentials, and considers the greenhouse gases Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), and Nitrous Oxide (N2O).

 

This improved process has enabled Alamos to assess Scope 3 data in greater detail, and understand the major drivers of these emissions and their evolution over time. We had approximately 20% less Scope 3 emissions in 2023 than 2022 – a reduction of 95,000 tCO2e. The most significant changes relate to the shutdown of our Mulatos Open Pit, which considerably reduced the mine’s emissions in the Purchased Goods and Services, Capital Goods, and Fuel and Energy Related Activities categories. We have also identified the current largest contributors to these emissions (Lime, Diesel, and Cement use at our Mulatos operations) and can now work toward managing these items moving forward.

Alamos 2023 Scope 3 GHG Emissions by Site

Figure 7.7

Alamos Estimated Scope 3 Emissions 2023

Table 7.9

Type Emissions (tCO2e) Calculation Methodology
1 Purchased Goods and Services 236,552 Spend-based method, except average-data method where mass or quantity and industry-average emission factor were available. 

2 Capital Goods 74,592 Spend-based method. 

3 Fuel and Energy-Related Activities 51,575 Category A: Average data method using industry average upstream emission factors for fuels.

Category B: Supplier-specific method based on publicly available data on fuel source breakdown for regional electric grids.

Category C: Average data method based on regional transmission losses from publicly available data.

Category D: Not applicable.
4 Upstream Transportation and Distribution 3,088 Shipped doré and used carbon: distance-based method.

Purchases: spend-based method.

5 Waste Generated in Operations 2,356 Waste-type specific method.
6 Business Travel 256 Distance-based method.
7 Employee Commuting 4,248 Distance-based method.
8 Upstream Lease Assets n/a Emissions associated with Alamos’s upstream leased assets are reported in Scopes 1 and 2 as Alamos exercises operational control over leased assets.
9 Downstream Transportation and Distribution 94 Distance-based method, based on estimated distribution routes of final products.
10 Processing of Sold Products 3,725 Average-data method.
11 Use of Sold Products n/a Not material because the amount of gold in any final products that use energy is very small compared to the content of other materials.
12 End-of-life treatment of sold products 1,393 Average-data method.
13 Downstream leased assets n/a Not applicable – Alamos does not operate any downstream leased assets.
14 Franchises n/a Not applicable – Alamos does not have any franchises.
15 Investments 1,082 Investment-specific method. Emissions of investee companies estimated based on industry averages.
Total Scope 3 Emissions 378,960
Previous
Tailings
Next
Data Tables

References

  1. https://climatedata.ca/resource/understanding-shared-socio-economic-pathways-ssps/
  2. Please refer to our Cautionary Statement with respect to the Company’s projects in Türkiye.
  3. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
  4. Target set between 5-15 years into the future covering at least 70% of emissions, or have been validated by SBTi (Science Based Targets initiative) 
  5. Carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
  6. https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/research/ghg-and-gold-mines-canada-emissions-drop-the-most#:
  7. Source of emission factors and GWP rates unknown (externally-provided information).
  8. GWP Reference used: IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5 – 100 year)
  9. Restated due to the previous under-reporting of Island Gold’s 2022 Scope 1 emissions, identified in a November 2023 audit
  10. GWP Reference used: IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
  11. Restated due to the previous under-reporting of Island Gold’s 2022 Scope 1 emissions, identified in a November 2023 audit
  12. https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/research/ghg-and-gold-mines-canada-emissions-drop-the-most#: